The Media Debate in Education

Technology has brought about a change in the way people do everything from making reservations, to getting directions, to keeping up with old friends. Yet the research methods for assessing if technology has any impact on learning are rooted in comparison studies developed to compare similar processes and standardized outcomes. Often the result leans more towards a simple evaluation of the methods, leading researchers such as Clark (1983) to conclude that there is no significant difference between delivery methods. It is time to forget comparison studies, as researchers we should be testing theories to inform practice, not comparing effectiveness (Lockee, Moore & Burton, 2001, 62). In the following post I will first look at how comparison studies have failed, and then discuss why a paradigm shift is necessary. Then I will pose some generalized questions researchers should be asking in support of this paradigm shift. Finally, I will follow-up these generalized questions with questions specific to my niche area: the design and development of virtual environments and social media, including Web 2.0 technologies.

For many students technology is a part of their everyday lives, from smart phones to computer games to Twitter, they interact with each other and the world around them through a high-tech lens. There was a time when people learned practical skills by being apprenticed to a master in the trade, now we teach so primary students have a broad understanding upon which to scaffold their learning experience. This knowledge however, is not always applicable to the lives they lead. It can be difficult to apply generalized knowledge to everyday experiences, but media methods allow the learner to manage cognitive, social and physical resources to create relevant knowledge (Kozma, 1994, p. 1). Swan (2003) argues that computers allow for a unique level of interaction, interaction to the media and to others through the media. This ability has the potential to create a paradigm change (p. 4). Comparative studies fail because they are stuck evaluating outcomes instead of researching the ways media can change the way students learn. The continuation of comparison studies drives a practice of development which encourages the new media to be the same as traditional education (Swan, 2003, p. 3). Instead of becoming mired in the no significant difference debate researchers need to ask if media such as virtual worlds teach something traditional methods do not. The research needs to drive a new practice of development (Lockee, Moore & Burton, 2001).

According to Sealund (2010) recent neurological research has proven that whole-brain activity occurs when learners are engaged in virtual learning environments, thus providing an atmosphere conducive to learning (p. 10). This increase in engagement is beneficial as these virtual environments allow for experimentation and “safe failures,” thereby increasing not only knowledge, but confidence and decision-making skills (p. 11). Maybe the skills students are learning using media methods are different than the skills learned in traditional classroom settings and therefore cannot be captured using comparison studies. Therefore the question researchers should be asking is not if virtual worlds are more effective in transferring knowledge, but are they effective in teaching learning behavior? Students aren’t learning to a test, but learning how to investigate, collaborate, analyze and implement in an environment that gives them immediate feedback (Swan, 2003). Comparison studies do not look at the soft skills of decision-making and self-reliance. It would be interesting to see a long-term study which evaluates if a student’s ability to comprehend, adapt and collaborate increases over time with the use of media methods. For my research proposes the first question that I would pose is: Can tools such as serious games be developed to teach critical thinking and problem solving skills that can be transferred to real life situations?

Researchers should not simply be asking questions about when media methods work (Kozma, 1991), but for whom does it work and at what age should it be implemented? Is there really a difference in the way males and females react to science and technology or is it a cultural misperception that “girls can’t do math” that leads to a gender gap in these fields? Mayer-Smith, Pedretti & Woodrow (2000) argue that current studies say there is no significant difference in computer anxiety between men and women (p. 53). Therefore, my second question takes the form of: Can unbiased media be used to deliver learning through such methods as androgynous virtual worlds in order to divert or negate the impact of the gender gap, thus increasing learning outcomes for females?

Clark, R. (1983). Reconsidering research on learning from media, Review of Educational Research, 53(4) 445–459.

Kozma, R. (1994). The influence of media on learning: The debate continues. School Library Media Research, 44(2). Retrieved from http://www.ala.org/ala/mgrps/divs/aasl/aaslpubsandjournals/slmrb/editorschoiceb/infopower/ALA_print_layout_1_202756_202756.cfm

Lockee, B. B., Moore, D. M., & Burton, J. K. (2001). Old concerns with new distance education research. Educause Quarterly, 24, 60–62.

Sealund, B. (2010). The power of virtual learning environments. Journal of Interactive Instruction Development 21(4), 9-12.

Swan, K. (2003). Learning effectiveness online: what the research tells us. In J. Bourne & J. C. Moore (Eds) Elements of Quality Online Education, Practice and Direction. Needham, MA: Sloan Center for Online Education, 13-45.

Mayer-Smith, J., Pedretti, E. & Woodrow, J. (2000). Closing of the gender gap in technology enriched science education: a case study. Computers & Education, 35(1) 51-63.